How The Bush Tax Cuts Blew Up The Deficit And Debt

[rosieaasful]

Its amazing how many middle class or poor right wingers don't the simple math and that Bushs tax cuts severly weakened this country. They were the ones who thought it was "Fuzzy math" when they were told that 99% of the tax breaks would go to the top 1%. These fools should have listened to common sense. Bush and his buddies behaved like irresponsible drunken college kids who had no jobs and got ahold of their parents credit cards. Raise taxes . Roll back Bush tax cuts to pre Bush.

[Laughingblades]

Raise taxes on the 1%, take us back to Pre-Bush tax rates, the Middle Class is paying more taxes now while the rich pay less and less. The right wing doesn't want Tax Cuts, they want tax breaks for the rich.

[coolbreezed]

So since the Bush Tax Cuts lowered taxes for EVERYONE then EVERYONE'S taxes should be raised?

Or is this just about class warfare?

[culturalmut]

short, sweet, and to the point. thank you.

[hyretech]

@AntiYouist, please post references if you are citing facts. Thanks!

[AntiYouist]

Brutal indisputable FACTS (you do remember what facts are people yes?)

1. High income taxes correlate with economic growth

2. Income tax increases are followed by economic growth

3. Moderate income tax cuts are followed by a flat economy

*That is a reality that no amount of propaganda can change- THESE are FACTS- you can NOT dispute them, do so you are willing ignorant or are a flat out liar.

[txmetalcobra]

@AntiYouist Where are your references?

[smb12321]

A question: If the Bush tax cuts decimated the economy why was the 2007 deficit (seven years after cuts were implemented) only 161 Billion? This despite the stupid war & drug program!!

I mean, if low taxes were the problem we should see a steadily increasing deficit. Instead, we see an average of 250B instantly balloon into 1.3 Trillion. The answer, of course, is massive increases in spending coupled with massive unemployment.

[teddybruscie]

This pretty much for anyone for Tax Cuts for the wealthy (cause its not coming to us.) And its a serious question too.

What happens if taxes are too low? Is that even possible and if taxes were at zero all across the board how will our government operate?

No left wings please just those that agree with tax cuts.

[dinerlee]

Facebook has blocked the link to this video as abusive, thanks no doubt to our Republican censors. Cowards that they are, our Republicans make a career of trying to hide or distort the facts, because they are always disadvantaged by them.

[stillkickin64]

The Bush apologists remind me of the Sarah Palin apologists who tried to change the Paul Revere Wikipedia page to reflect her word soup answer to a very simple question. George Orwell didn't know how prophetic his words would be.

[southport97]

Bush = the curse that keeps cursing.

[bcpipes]

"Liberals say, '2+2=4'! Conservatives say, '2+2=5'! We report! You decide!" Poorly informed FOX viewer decides, "They are all lying extremists! So, 2+2 must equal 4.5!"

[ibigheadjoe]

Tax cuts don't add to debt and/or deficit. 

[Fuctmentality]

@ibigheadjoe 2+2=5

[Dabipster]

@ibigheadjoe

Stop working and getting paid, but still keep your bills at the same rate. See if you go into debt.

In comparison gwb cut government INCOME (taxes) and increased spending w/ the wars.

YES! It directly affects the deficit (income v. expenditure) and it DOES add to the debt.

Stop listening to talking points, and use some common sense.

[ibigheadjoe]

@Dabipster That is my point. If my revenue is less I would stop spending so much. That is the common sense thing to do. Revenue increased under the tax cuts because the economy did better with the tax cuts.

[Dabipster]

@ibigheadjoe

Just google the phrase "Bush Tax Cuts Had Little Positive Impact on the Economy" so you can be soundly debunked. NVM the fact that true cost-cutting measures will never be passed by the repubs. Oil subsidies & military spending FAR outstrip the B.S. cuts they make

[audas]

@ibigheadjoe

If I am earning $500 and spending $450 then I am $50 in surplus, like Clinton.

If I then decide to cut me earnings to $300 and increase my spending at $550 then I am $250 in debt like Bush.

So tax directly effects Debt - you EPIC moron.

p.s.

spending under Bush went up through two unfunded wars.

Have a nice day.

[ibigheadjoe]

@audas You are the epic moron. The reason the deficit went up was the spending not the tax cut. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. So the tax cut helped the economy. People made more money and the gov't collected more money. The spending is the problem.

Hope you learned something

P.S. We have three unfunded wars now

[cmfluteguy]

@ibigheadjoe

You have an advanced case of Dunning-Kruger.

Seek help.

[SuperSpooky999]

@ibigheadjoe You're right...but you won't convince the liberals and Bush haters of that. Tax cuts provide revenue to motor the economy, providing jobs, etc. BUT that one dimension is not taken into consideration on this monolithic propaganda video.

[frepi]

@SuperSpooky999

Since the tax are now lower than they were during the Clinton years, how do you explain the slow if existant recovery? Low tax are supposed to boost the "motor" of the economy as you said. Where was this recovery?

[audas]

@ibigheadjoe

Really is that right ? your not too bright are you champ.

Revenue has to be calculated as part of GDP, because revenue goes up through growth - immigration etc. Hence there are costs, Tax percentage of GDP went from around 20% down to 16% and is now at %14 - just measuring a static figure is about as meaningful as reading tea leaves you muppet.

If I tax each person in my house and It increase by $500 im better off, but I have 500 extra mouths now, inflation, blah blah IDIOT

[xCivikx]

@ibigheadjoe

Lol even if tax revenues increased by $785 billion over those 4 years, it doesn't change the fact that defense spending shot up to $800 billion PER YEAR towards the end of Bush's 2nd term, and it's still projected to increase

[Adnihilo]

@xCivikx defense spending shot up to $800 billion PER YEAR towards the end of Bush's 2nd term

Not even close - it was 333 Billion when he 'took' [aka stole] office in 20001 and 700 billion when he left in 2008

[xCivikx]

@Adnihilo

First of all, how is 700 "not even close" to 800?

Secondly, no, it was above 800 billion when he left office

[Adnihilo]

@xCivikx "defense spending shot up to $800 billion PER YEAR towards the end of Bush's 2nd term"

Defense spending never even came close to going up $800 billion PER YEAR EVER! It started at 333 billion in 2001 and ended at 700 billion in 2008 - if you've even 1st grade math skills, you'll see it more than doubled during the Bush Admin, but it never went up $800 billion PER YEAR

[xCivikx]

@Adnihilo

I've seen multiple estimations of 800 billion PER YEAR. You're absolutely harping on the wrong thing

[Adnihilo]

You originally claimed "defense spending shot up to $800 billion PER YEAR towards the end of Bush's 2nd term" and now you come back 2 weeks later to claim you originally said "I've seen multiple estimations of 800 billion PER YEAR".

Just admit you made a mistake rather than trying to lie about what you claimed in 'shot up 800 billion a year'.

[xCivikx]

@Adnihilo

If I thought that I was wrong then I would have said that I was wrong. I'm going off of the estimations that I've seen, which say 800 billion

[Adnihilo]

You're claiming defense spending 'shot up' or increased $800 B PER YEAR and you even 'shouted' PER YEAR! Defense spending did not, nor has it ever increased [aka 'shot up] $800 B 'per year'. That would mean defense spending increases at a geometric rate, which it doesn't. THINK before you start typing whatever nonsense comes out of your tiny, uneducated 3rd grade mentality!

[smb12321]

@xCivikx It;s official - you're an idiot. If Defense went up $800 Billion/year. In 5 years it would be better than the entire budget. Maybe you need other sources besides Daily Kos or MoveOn.org.

[Adnihilo]

@ibigheadjoe The reason the deficit went up was the spending not the tax cut.

Your head is swollen 'big head joe'. Spending went up yes, but Bush's lowered tax for the wealthy, including capital gains tax dropping to just 15% [directly benefiting the wealthy] LOST a tax revenue of 2.5 trillion over 10 years, or about 830 billion during that same period revenues went up 785 billion from 2004 to 2007 [if true]

[Adnihilo]

@ibigheadjoe "You are the epic moron.....the tax cut helped the economy."

Your big bloated head is showing again 'big head joe' almost as much in those above statements as the one you made claiming "Tax cuts don't add to debt and/or deficit. " You're definitely watching too much Fox Fake News Bloated Head Joe and you post just like the classic Lard Arse Limbaugh Ditto Head!

[11binf9]

@audas Are you really going to talk about Bush's spending here? The only epic moron here is you. Its funny how two unfunded wars cost less than Obams Stimulus. Its funny how in 3 yrs Obama has spent more than Bush in 8 yrs. Its also funny that Obot extended the Bush tax cuts because even he knows it would screw the economy up even more. I would love to compare Bush's numbers to Obots any day of the week. Even an epic moron can do simple math.

[xCivikx]

@11binf9

What's also funny is how you call the stimulus "Obama's" when in actuality Bush approved the bailout as one of his last acts before leaving office.

I can tell that you're smart though

[11binf9]

@xCivikx So you can't tell the difference between the bailouts and the stimulus plan? Now I know I am dealing with a smart guy. I suppose looking at simple numbers is a real task for you. The stimulus is 100% Obots , he gets all the credit.

[skepticalsinner]

@11binf9 *sings* and I know it's true cos Fox toooolllllld me sooooo.

[11binf9]

@skepticalsinner Ya, what a fool for watching the number one rated news station, silly me. I do not need fox news to do math . Apparently you can only use your MSNBC talking points that they tell all 10 of their listeners. Get some facts and then come back and talk.

[skepticalsinner]

@11binf9 Wow. Where to start. The issues you have with the "obama stimulus package" - you said " I do not see his stimulus package which cost MORE than the Iraq war" - it is mentioned 0:22 seconds in as TARP & Recovery measures - the very first one. And for added bonus points, go look up TARP and see what president signed it into law. The additional recovery efforts added approx 2.3% of the debt, included in the 1st line (the dark blue one) and about a 1/4 of the effect of the two wars.

[skepticalsinner]

@11binf9 I've stated my position and used actual facts, so I'll do you one better: When you have facts that are actually true, come back and talk. In the meantime, do yourself (and any other poor YouTube viewer who has to read your reeking garbage of an opinion) a favor... go educate yourself. And kudos for having the cojones to mention "Fox News" and "Facts" in the same sentence.

[11binf9]

@skepticalsinner I am sorry I thought the CBO was a bipartisan committee, silly me. I see you using the 2011 budget. is that magic? Is this the budget that noone has seen yet? The one passed last week after 800 days? Thats called a fact. I do like how you sa1.48 like its much better than a higher number. Its a trillion more than Bush ever added in 1 yr, ANOTHER FACT.

[11binf9]

@skepticalsinner This video is laughable. I am surprised I do not see anything with Obots name on it? I do not see his stimulus package which cost MORE than the Iraq war. I do not see anywhere how before Obot took office the deficits were FALLING? Where in this chart does it show Obots Obama’s own budget proposal in February adds $9.5 TRILLION in new debt. We’ll have gone from about $7 trillion when he took office to $22 trillion. Just curious where those numbers are?

[xCivikx]

@11binf9

Again, I just want to stress how much of a moron you are. Obama/the Democrats have not passed a single major piece of legislation that would have anywhere near the effect on the economy that Bush's administration had/has. We're going to be feeling the aftereffects for years

[11binf9]

@xCivikx You are kidding me right? You would have to be in a coma to not know what Obama has done. The only one who is and will be affecting us is Obot. How can you be so ignorant?

[skepticalsinner]

@11binf9 Reply pt II. "Where in this chart does it show Obama’s own budget proposal in Feb adds $9.5 TRILLION in new debt?" - not sure where you're getting *YOUR* facts from. (ahem Fox?) but the 2011 USA FY budget adds $1.48 trillion so you're a little off with your outrage. The total US Debt is c. $14.5 trillion - you are incorrect again. As for accountability-when GWB took office National Debt was 54% of GDP. When BHO took office it was 83%, and had to deal w/ a lil recession that impacted GDP

[11binf9]

@skepticalsinner CBO estimates Obama's plan would produce 10 years of deficits totaling $9.5 trillion. Thats from the CBO, I am going to go with them instead of your math. The democrats have NOT passed a budget for 800 days, thats a FACT. Obots last attempt was voted down in 2010 by 97-0, thats a FACT. 14.5 trillion is correct. Its a shame that it was around 10 tril when Obot took office. In 3 yrs Obot has equalled Bush, congrats! What is your point? Obot is spending more than Bush?

[avelvetcrush]

@ibigheadjoe : how is the weather on Mars, btw??

[kirbienstien]

how is not taxing considered spending ?

[Adnihilo]

@kirbienstien

How is not taxing the stinkin rich considered spending? If those tax funds from the wealthy had otherwise been available, the gov't would not of gone into debt to obtain said tax funds...

[kirbienstien]

@Adnihilo thats flawed reasoning. they wouldn't need that tax revenue if they never spent money.

[Adnihilo]

@kirbienstien

With a name sporting a 'stein' at the end, I'd think you'd understand concepts dealing with money far more. We're not talking about "IF" the gov't never spent money, because they have and will continue to spend money they don't have - we're talking about tax money the Bush Admin didn't levy on the stinkin rich to instead waste it on killing brown people while ignoring the health of its own citizenry

[kirbienstien]

@Adnihilo

If they knew their would be tax cuts why did the congress continue to spend? why did the senate and house approve a budget of spending more than they would be taking in?

[CisMediaGuy]

@kirbienstien because they are trying to destroy the economy and force the lower and middle class into slavery. Did you know that ever US senator votes right of center. Even Obama is right of center.

[Adnihilo]

@kirbienstien

The republicans campaign on cutting big gov't and the deficit, but as we saw during the Bush Admin, the exact opposite happened by a huge amount. Bush greatly lowered taxes for the wealthy while putting us into 2 wars that have cost over 5 trillion to date. The gov't is addicted to war - that's where 1/2 of every income tax dollar goes...

[kirbienstien]

@Adnihilo spending only increased in one area, Defense and that was because of a war.

[Adnihilo]

@kirbienstien

I haven't a clue what you're talking about...

[dasheight]

Fantastic video. Will share everywhere. Thanks.

[arkham1999]

But wait according to the Repubs it is still Obamas fault. LOL

[ConSAmerica]

What about the 2001 recession and burst of the Dot Com bubble? How much did those events effect the debt?

[audas]

@ConSAmerica

the 2001 recession was as a direct result of 911 and basically was over before it started, so not at all really. The dot com bubble was exclusively in the stock market - so although a lot of people went bust this did not translate nearly to employment and the real economy as the housing collapse due to credit defaults. Companies had three people in them and were valued at 300 million.

Tax cuts are destroying America, deliberately,

USSA !!

[Adnihilo]

@audas

More specifically, Tax Cuts on the stinkin rich are destroying America.

[ConSAmerica]

@audas But nearly 3 million jobs were lost after that recession, that has to effect income tax and payroll revenues.. Plus, with the stock market you lose capital gains revenue, after the 2000 crash capital gains revenues basically rolled back to 1991 levels.

I also distinctly remember airline bailouts back then.

So these things must have effected the debt some how, so I just wanted to know by how much.